[OpenStack-Infra] Ballot for Openstack elections
I have not received a ballot email for the OpenStack Pike PTL elections. -Louis Fourie ___ OpenStack-Infra mailing list OpenStack-Infra@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-infra
Re: [OpenStack-Infra] Ballot for Openstack elections
On 2017-02-22 21:17:40 + (+), Henry Fourie wrote: > I have not received a ballot email for the OpenStack Pike PTL elections. You would have only received ballots for projects to which you contributed _if_ there were a runoff election between multiple candidates. Of the 5 teams who had PTL elections for Pike: https://governance.openstack.org/election/results/pike/ptl.html#results I don't see any indication that you contributed to any of their deliverable repositories: https://review.openstack.org/#/q/owner:louis.fou...@huawei.com Can you clarify which of those 5 teams you believe should have included you in their electorate? The election officials should be able to double-check the rolls and see if there's any discrepancy. -- Jeremy Stanley ___ OpenStack-Infra mailing list OpenStack-Infra@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-infra
Re: [OpenStack-Infra] Ballot for Openstack elections
Jeremy, My contributions are to networking-sfc which is part of neutron. - Louis -Original Message- From: Jeremy Stanley [mailto:fu...@yuggoth.org] Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2017 1:58 PM To: Henry Fourie Cc: openstack-infra@lists.openstack.org; Cathy Zhang Subject: Re: [OpenStack-Infra] Ballot for Openstack elections On 2017-02-22 21:17:40 + (+), Henry Fourie wrote: > I have not received a ballot email for the OpenStack Pike PTL elections. You would have only received ballots for projects to which you contributed _if_ there were a runoff election between multiple candidates. Of the 5 teams who had PTL elections for Pike: https://governance.openstack.org/election/results/pike/ptl.html#results I don't see any indication that you contributed to any of their deliverable repositories: https://review.openstack.org/#/q/owner:louis.fou...@huawei.com Can you clarify which of those 5 teams you believe should have included you in their electorate? The election officials should be able to double-check the rolls and see if there's any discrepancy. -- Jeremy Stanley ___ OpenStack-Infra mailing list OpenStack-Infra@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-infra
Re: [OpenStack-Infra] Ballot for Openstack elections
On 2017-02-22 22:03:53 + (+), Henry Fourie wrote: > My contributions are to networking-sfc which is part of neutron. Thanks! It does seem to have been officially part of Neutron at the time of their PTL election: http://git.openstack.org/cgit/openstack/governance/tree/reference/projects.yaml?h=jan-2017-elections#n2152 And this contribution should have resulted in you being on the roll for the Neutron PTL election: https://review.openstack.org/401349 I've Cc'd the election officials so they can double-check their copy of the rolls. -- Jeremy Stanley ___ OpenStack-Infra mailing list OpenStack-Infra@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-infra
Re: [OpenStack-Infra] Ballot for Openstack elections
I am the project lead and core member of networking-sfc project which is part of Neutron. I have not received the ballot email for the OpenStack Neutron PTL election. Could you add us for future election? Thanks, Cathy -Original Message- From: Jeremy Stanley [mailto:fu...@yuggoth.org] Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2017 2:17 PM To: Henry Fourie Cc: openstack-infra@lists.openstack.org; Cathy Zhang; Tristan Cacqueray; Kendall Nelson Subject: Re: [OpenStack-Infra] Ballot for Openstack elections On 2017-02-22 22:03:53 + (+), Henry Fourie wrote: > My contributions are to networking-sfc which is part of neutron. Thanks! It does seem to have been officially part of Neutron at the time of their PTL election: http://git.openstack.org/cgit/openstack/governance/tree/reference/projects.yaml?h=jan-2017-elections#n2152 And this contribution should have resulted in you being on the roll for the Neutron PTL election: https://review.openstack.org/401349 I've Cc'd the election officials so they can double-check their copy of the rolls. -- Jeremy Stanley ___ OpenStack-Infra mailing list OpenStack-Infra@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-infra
Re: [OpenStack-Infra] Ballot for Openstack elections
On 2017-02-22 22:25:23 + (+), Cathy Zhang wrote: > I am the project lead and core member of networking-sfc project > which is part of Neutron. I have not received the ballot email for > the OpenStack Neutron PTL election. Could you add us for future > election? Assuming your addresses did appear in the rolls for that election, is it possible that the huawei.com mailservers rejected E-mail from c...@cs.cornell.edu (the election polling system we use)? -- Jeremy Stanley ___ OpenStack-Infra mailing list OpenStack-Infra@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-infra
Re: [OpenStack-Infra] Ballot for Openstack elections
On 02/22/2017 10:17 PM, Jeremy Stanley wrote: > On 2017-02-22 22:03:53 + (+), Henry Fourie wrote: >> My contributions are to networking-sfc which is part of neutron. > > Thanks! It does seem to have been officially part of Neutron at the > time of their PTL election: > > http://git.openstack.org/cgit/openstack/governance/tree/reference/projects.yaml?h=jan-2017-elections#n2152 > > And this contribution should have resulted in you being on the roll > for the Neutron PTL election: > > https://review.openstack.org/401349 > > I've Cc'd the election officials so they can double-check their copy > of the rolls. > Hi, A ballot was indeed sent to Henry Fourie mail address... It seems like some mailservers (e.g. intel.com) have throttle cornell.edu server and some ballot had to be resent. Unfortunately election officials can't check when ballot aren't delivered and we only resent them on direct request. Regards, -Tristan signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ OpenStack-Infra mailing list OpenStack-Infra@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-infra
Re: [OpenStack-Infra] Ballot for Openstack elections
Hi, The electorate roll generation tool[0] we used only collect owner of gerrit merged review and Cathy actually wasn't part of the Neutron's roll for Pike. It seems like the tool would need to also check for Co-Author in commit message, but afaik it's not possible to assert Foundation Member status solly based on mail address... Perhaps for such case, co-author could be added to the extra-atc list? Regards, -Tristan [0] https://git.openstack.org/cgit/openstack-infra/system-config/tree/tools/owners.py On 02/22/2017 10:25 PM, Cathy Zhang wrote: > I am the project lead and core member of networking-sfc project which is part > of Neutron. > I have not received the ballot email for the OpenStack Neutron PTL election. > Could you add us for future election? > > Thanks, > Cathy > > -Original Message- > From: Jeremy Stanley [mailto:fu...@yuggoth.org] > Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2017 2:17 PM > To: Henry Fourie > Cc: openstack-infra@lists.openstack.org; Cathy Zhang; Tristan Cacqueray; > Kendall Nelson > Subject: Re: [OpenStack-Infra] Ballot for Openstack elections > > On 2017-02-22 22:03:53 + (+), Henry Fourie wrote: >> My contributions are to networking-sfc which is part of neutron. > > Thanks! It does seem to have been officially part of Neutron at the time of > their PTL election: > > http://git.openstack.org/cgit/openstack/governance/tree/reference/projects.yaml?h=jan-2017-elections#n2152 > > And this contribution should have resulted in you being on the roll for the > Neutron PTL election: > > https://review.openstack.org/401349 > > I've Cc'd the election officials so they can double-check their copy of the > rolls. > -- > Jeremy Stanley > > ___ > OpenStack-Infra mailing list > OpenStack-Infra@lists.openstack.org > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-infra > signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ OpenStack-Infra mailing list OpenStack-Infra@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-infra
Re: [OpenStack-Infra] Ballot for Openstack elections
Certainly this is what nova has done in the past: collected co-authors, verified their membership status, and then proposed them to extra-atcs. Michael On Feb 23, 2017 11:50 AM, "Tristan Cacqueray" wrote: > Hi, > > The electorate roll generation tool[0] we used only collect owner of > gerrit merged review and Cathy actually wasn't part of the Neutron's > roll for Pike. It seems like the tool would need to also check for > Co-Author in commit message, but afaik it's not possible to assert > Foundation Member status solly based on mail address... > > Perhaps for such case, co-author could be added to the extra-atc list? > > Regards, > -Tristan > > [0] > https://git.openstack.org/cgit/openstack-infra/system- > config/tree/tools/owners.py > > On 02/22/2017 10:25 PM, Cathy Zhang wrote: > > I am the project lead and core member of networking-sfc project which is > part of Neutron. > > I have not received the ballot email for the OpenStack Neutron PTL > election. Could you add us for future election? > > > > Thanks, > > Cathy > > > > -Original Message- > > From: Jeremy Stanley [mailto:fu...@yuggoth.org] > > Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2017 2:17 PM > > To: Henry Fourie > > Cc: openstack-infra@lists.openstack.org; Cathy Zhang; Tristan > Cacqueray; Kendall Nelson > > Subject: Re: [OpenStack-Infra] Ballot for Openstack elections > > > > On 2017-02-22 22:03:53 + (+), Henry Fourie wrote: > >> My contributions are to networking-sfc which is part of neutron. > > > > Thanks! It does seem to have been officially part of Neutron at the time > of their PTL election: > > > > http://git.openstack.org/cgit/openstack/governance/tree/ > reference/projects.yaml?h=jan-2017-elections#n2152 > > > > And this contribution should have resulted in you being on the roll for > the Neutron PTL election: > > > > https://review.openstack.org/401349 > > > > I've Cc'd the election officials so they can double-check their copy of > the rolls. > > -- > > Jeremy Stanley > > > > ___ > > OpenStack-Infra mailing list > > OpenStack-Infra@lists.openstack.org > > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-infra > > > > > > ___ > OpenStack-Infra mailing list > OpenStack-Infra@lists.openstack.org > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-infra > ___ OpenStack-Infra mailing list OpenStack-Infra@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-infra
Re: [OpenStack-Infra] Ballot for Openstack elections
On Thu, Feb 23, 2017 at 12:44:43AM +, Tristan Cacqueray wrote: > Hi, > > The electorate roll generation tool[0] we used only collect owner of > gerrit merged review and Cathy actually wasn't part of the Neutron's > roll for Pike. It seems like the tool would need to also check for > Co-Author in commit message, but afaik it's not possible to assert > Foundation Member status solly based on mail address... > > Perhaps for such case, co-author could be added to the extra-atc list? Yup that's a per-project decision right now. I s'pose we could ask for a TC resolution to clarify / madate this if someone in the community felt strongly enough about this. Yours Tony. signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ OpenStack-Infra mailing list OpenStack-Infra@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-infra
Re: [OpenStack-Infra] Ballot for Openstack elections
Hi Tony, I strongly support the proposal to mandate this. To be fair, I think TC should mandate this across all projects. In many complicated and technically hard commits, co-author does not make any less amount of technical contribution to the commit. If just the owner is counted, people will start to fight for the ownership of a commit which is not healthy for the open source community. For my own case, it is well known that I am the initiator and project lead of this networking-sfc project and have contributed a lot to this project on the technical side and project management side. I have done many reviews and approvals in this cycle and co-authored quite some commits. It is a surprise to me that co-author is not counted as technical contributor in Neutron. Thanks, Cathy -Original Message- From: Tony Breeds [mailto:t...@bakeyournoodle.com] Sent: Thursday, February 23, 2017 9:05 AM To: Tristan Cacqueray Cc: Cathy Zhang; Jeremy Stanley; Henry Fourie; openstack-infra@lists.openstack.org; Kendall Nelson Subject: Re: [OpenStack-Infra] Ballot for Openstack elections On Thu, Feb 23, 2017 at 12:44:43AM +, Tristan Cacqueray wrote: > Hi, > > The electorate roll generation tool[0] we used only collect owner of > gerrit merged review and Cathy actually wasn't part of the Neutron's > roll for Pike. It seems like the tool would need to also check for > Co-Author in commit message, but afaik it's not possible to assert > Foundation Member status solly based on mail address... > > Perhaps for such case, co-author could be added to the extra-atc list? Yup that's a per-project decision right now. I s'pose we could ask for a TC resolution to clarify / madate this if someone in the community felt strongly enough about this. Yours Tony. ___ OpenStack-Infra mailing list OpenStack-Infra@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-infra
Re: [OpenStack-Infra] Ballot for Openstack elections
Tony, I support the need to include commit co-authors to recognize their contributions. - Louis -Original Message- From: Cathy Zhang Sent: Thursday, February 23, 2017 10:38 AM To: Tony Breeds; Tristan Cacqueray; Cathy Zhang Cc: Jeremy Stanley; Henry Fourie; openstack-infra@lists.openstack.org; Kendall Nelson Subject: RE: [OpenStack-Infra] Ballot for Openstack elections Hi Tony, I strongly support the proposal to mandate this. To be fair, I think TC should mandate this across all projects. In many complicated and technically hard commits, co-author does not make any less amount of technical contribution to the commit. If just the owner is counted, people will start to fight for the ownership of a commit which is not healthy for the open source community. For my own case, it is well known that I am the initiator and project lead of this networking-sfc project and have contributed a lot to this project on the technical side and project management side. I have done many reviews and approvals in this cycle and co-authored quite some commits. It is a surprise to me that co-author is not counted as technical contributor in Neutron. Thanks, Cathy -Original Message- From: Tony Breeds [mailto:t...@bakeyournoodle.com] Sent: Thursday, February 23, 2017 9:05 AM To: Tristan Cacqueray Cc: Cathy Zhang; Jeremy Stanley; Henry Fourie; openstack-infra@lists.openstack.org; Kendall Nelson Subject: Re: [OpenStack-Infra] Ballot for Openstack elections On Thu, Feb 23, 2017 at 12:44:43AM +, Tristan Cacqueray wrote: > Hi, > > The electorate roll generation tool[0] we used only collect owner of > gerrit merged review and Cathy actually wasn't part of the Neutron's > roll for Pike. It seems like the tool would need to also check for > Co-Author in commit message, but afaik it's not possible to assert > Foundation Member status solly based on mail address... > > Perhaps for such case, co-author could be added to the extra-atc list? Yup that's a per-project decision right now. I s'pose we could ask for a TC resolution to clarify / madate this if someone in the community felt strongly enough about this. Yours Tony. ___ OpenStack-Infra mailing list OpenStack-Infra@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-infra
Re: [OpenStack-Infra] Ballot for Openstack elections
On 2017-02-23 18:37:49 + (+), Cathy Zhang wrote: > I strongly support the proposal to mandate this. To be fair, I > think TC should mandate this across all projects. In many > complicated and technically hard commits, co-author does not make > any less amount of technical contribution to the commit. If just > the owner is counted, people will start to fight for the ownership > of a commit which is not healthy for the open source community. > > For my own case, it is well known that I am the initiator and > project lead of this networking-sfc project and have contributed a > lot to this project on the technical side and project management > side. I have done many reviews and approvals in this cycle and > co-authored quite some commits. It is a surprise to me that > co-author is not counted as technical contributor in Neutron. The technical limitations for this in the past have been twofold: 1. Gerrit did not provide a usable API for querying arbitrary substrings from commit messages. 2. Voters must be foundation individual members and we had no way to query the foundation member database by contributor E-mail address. The first is less of an issue in the version of Gerrit we're running now and the second is a situation I'm collaborating with the foundation's development team to attempt to resolve. In the meantime, the solution has been that PTLs should entertain requests from co-authors to be added to the "extra ATCs" list for their project. I don't personally have any objection to letting change co-authors vote in elections, we just don't (yet) have a solution to be able to automatically verify whether they're authorized to vote under our bylaws and charter. Separately, there was a problem back when we used to provide free conference passes to code contributors, where someone at a company would submit a punctuation fix to a comment in some project, add half a dozen of their co-workers as co-authors, and then ask for free admission for all of them (this really happened). Relying on PTLs to vet extra ATCs before adding them was how we mitigated this. Now that we no longer rely directly on code contributions to decide who should get free/discounted conference admission this issue should hopefully be purely historical. People seem to be far less interested in gaming elections than going to conferences (or in some cases scalping free tickets as a money-making scheme). -- Jeremy Stanley ___ OpenStack-Infra mailing list OpenStack-Infra@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-infra
Re: [OpenStack-Infra] Ballot for Openstack elections
On 2017-02-23 02:12 PM, Jeremy Stanley wrote: On 2017-02-23 18:37:49 + (+), Cathy Zhang wrote: I strongly support the proposal to mandate this. To be fair, I think TC should mandate this across all projects. In many complicated and technically hard commits, co-author does not make any less amount of technical contribution to the commit. If just the owner is counted, people will start to fight for the ownership of a commit which is not healthy for the open source community. For my own case, it is well known that I am the initiator and project lead of this networking-sfc project and have contributed a lot to this project on the technical side and project management side. I have done many reviews and approvals in this cycle and co-authored quite some commits. It is a surprise to me that co-author is not counted as technical contributor in Neutron. The technical limitations for this in the past have been twofold: 1. Gerrit did not provide a usable API for querying arbitrary substrings from commit messages. 2. Voters must be foundation individual members and we had no way to query the foundation member database by contributor E-mail address. The first is less of an issue in the version of Gerrit we're running now and the second is a situation I'm collaborating with the foundation's development team to attempt to resolve. In the meantime, the solution has been that PTLs should entertain requests from co-authors to be added to the "extra ATCs" list for their project. I don't personally have any objection to letting change co-authors vote in elections, we just don't (yet) have a solution to be able to automatically verify whether they're authorized to vote under our bylaws and charter. Separately, there was a problem back when we used to provide free conference passes to code contributors, where someone at a company would submit a punctuation fix to a comment in some project, add half a dozen of their co-workers as co-authors, and then ask for free admission for all of them (this really happened). Relying on PTLs to vet extra ATCs before adding them was how we mitigated this. Now that we no longer rely directly on code contributions to decide who should get free/discounted conference admission this issue should hopefully be purely historical. People seem to be far less interested in gaming elections than going to conferences (or in some cases scalping free tickets as a money-making scheme). In addition, under the bylaws 3. (b) (ii) https://www.openstack.org/legal/technical-committee-member-policy/ any individual may apply to the chair of the Technical Committee for extra-ATC status. Now should anyone elect to do this, I would hope they would have conversed with the PTL of their applicable project prior to applying to the TC chair. Also the governance repo, in which the extra-ATCs are recorded, is tagged in advance of each election so that any questions about the composition of the electoral roll have a common reference point. Should an individual elect to apply directly to the TC chair for extra-ATC consideration I would highly suggest they do so well in advance of any tagging cadence. To be honest, I suspect any PTL would welcome assistance composing, verifying and submitting the list of extra-ATCs to the governance repo. People might consider offering to help here. Thanks, Anita. ___ OpenStack-Infra mailing list OpenStack-Infra@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-infra
Re: [OpenStack-Infra] Ballot for Openstack elections
Jeremy, Cathy is an owner of a recent commit: https://review.openstack.org/401349 Can you verify that she was eligible to vote. - Louis -Original Message- From: Jeremy Stanley [mailto:fu...@yuggoth.org] Sent: Thursday, February 23, 2017 11:12 AM To: Cathy Zhang Cc: Tony Breeds; Tristan Cacqueray; Henry Fourie; openstack-infra@lists.openstack.org; Kendall Nelson Subject: Re: [OpenStack-Infra] Ballot for Openstack elections On 2017-02-23 18:37:49 + (+), Cathy Zhang wrote: > I strongly support the proposal to mandate this. To be fair, I think > TC should mandate this across all projects. In many complicated and > technically hard commits, co-author does not make any less amount of > technical contribution to the commit. If just the owner is counted, > people will start to fight for the ownership of a commit which is not > healthy for the open source community. > > For my own case, it is well known that I am the initiator and project > lead of this networking-sfc project and have contributed a lot to this > project on the technical side and project management side. I have done > many reviews and approvals in this cycle and co-authored quite some > commits. It is a surprise to me that co-author is not counted as > technical contributor in Neutron. The technical limitations for this in the past have been twofold: 1. Gerrit did not provide a usable API for querying arbitrary substrings from commit messages. 2. Voters must be foundation individual members and we had no way to query the foundation member database by contributor E-mail address. The first is less of an issue in the version of Gerrit we're running now and the second is a situation I'm collaborating with the foundation's development team to attempt to resolve. In the meantime, the solution has been that PTLs should entertain requests from co-authors to be added to the "extra ATCs" list for their project. I don't personally have any objection to letting change co-authors vote in elections, we just don't (yet) have a solution to be able to automatically verify whether they're authorized to vote under our bylaws and charter. Separately, there was a problem back when we used to provide free conference passes to code contributors, where someone at a company would submit a punctuation fix to a comment in some project, add half a dozen of their co-workers as co-authors, and then ask for free admission for all of them (this really happened). Relying on PTLs to vet extra ATCs before adding them was how we mitigated this. Now that we no longer rely directly on code contributions to decide who should get free/discounted conference admission this issue should hopefully be purely historical. People seem to be far less interested in gaming elections than going to conferences (or in some cases scalping free tickets as a money-making scheme). -- Jeremy Stanley ___ OpenStack-Infra mailing list OpenStack-Infra@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-infra
Re: [OpenStack-Infra] Ballot for Openstack elections
On Thu, Feb 23, 2017 at 08:27:49PM +, Henry Fourie wrote: > Jeremy, >Cathy is an owner of a recent commit: https://review.openstack.org/401349 That change is owned by Louie not Cathy. Note I am not an election offical but the election timeline [2] states: The electorate for this election are the Foundation individual members that are also committers for one of the official project teams repositories over the Newton-Ocata timeframe (Apr 11, 2016 00:00 UTC to Jan 23, 2017 23:59 UTC). So from there we can deduce the following URL[2]: https://review.openstack.org/#/q/after:2016-04-11+before:2017-01-24+is:merged+owner:cathy Which would make Cathy eligable to vote in an election in Release Management but not Neutron. Yours Tony. [1] https://governance.openstack.org/election/#electorate [2] The date range in the URL is slightly more generous than the one specified in [1] signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ OpenStack-Infra mailing list OpenStack-Infra@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-infra
Re: [OpenStack-Infra] Ballot for Openstack elections
Tony, My apologies - pasted the wrong link. This is the correct one showing Cathy as the owner of this commit. https://review.openstack.org/#/c/396380/ Cathy is certainly a key contributor with significant involvement in OpenStack. She is co-author of several commits over the recent six months: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/389799/ https://review.openstack.org/#/c/333172/ https://review.openstack.org/#/c/368155/ https://review.openstack.org/#/c/319393/ https://review.openstack.org/#/c/348574/ It would make sense to have this recognized. - Louis -Original Message- From: Tony Breeds [mailto:t...@bakeyournoodle.com] Sent: Thursday, February 23, 2017 1:51 PM To: Henry Fourie Cc: Jeremy Stanley; Cathy Zhang; Tristan Cacqueray; openstack-infra@lists.openstack.org; Kendall Nelson Subject: Re: [OpenStack-Infra] Ballot for Openstack elections On Thu, Feb 23, 2017 at 08:27:49PM +, Henry Fourie wrote: > Jeremy, >Cathy is an owner of a recent commit: > https://review.openstack.org/401349 That change is owned by Louie not Cathy. Note I am not an election offical but the election timeline [2] states: The electorate for this election are the Foundation individual members that are also committers for one of the official project teams repositories over the Newton-Ocata timeframe (Apr 11, 2016 00:00 UTC to Jan 23, 2017 23:59 UTC). So from there we can deduce the following URL[2]: https://review.openstack.org/#/q/after:2016-04-11+before:2017-01-24+is:merged+owner:cathy Which would make Cathy eligable to vote in an election in Release Management but not Neutron. Yours Tony. [1] https://governance.openstack.org/election/#electorate [2] The date range in the URL is slightly more generous than the one specified in [1] ___ OpenStack-Infra mailing list OpenStack-Infra@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-infra
Re: [OpenStack-Infra] Ballot for Openstack elections
On 02/23/2017 11:21 PM, Henry Fourie wrote: > Tony, > My apologies - pasted the wrong link. This is the correct one showing > Cathy as the owner of this commit. > https://review.openstack.org/#/c/396380/ > > Cathy is certainly a key contributor with significant involvement in > OpenStack. > She is co-author of several commits over the recent six months: > > https://review.openstack.org/#/c/389799/ > https://review.openstack.org/#/c/333172/ > https://review.openstack.org/#/c/368155/ > https://review.openstack.org/#/c/319393/ > https://review.openstack.org/#/c/348574/ > > > It would make sense to have this recognized. Henry, fwiw there is no doubt Cathy is a key contributor, it's just a matter of figuring out how to include such members into the electorate rolls. The current system uses gerrit review owners over the last two cycles to collect active contributors that are also foundation member (e.g. member who signed the OpenStack Individual Contributor License Agreement). It may be possible to improve the system to automatically include co-authors. Until then, such contributor can still be recognized throw the extra-atc lists in the governance repository, for example: https://git.openstack.org/cgit/openstack/governance/tree/reference/projects.yaml#n147 I hope that clarify this situation. -Tristan > > - Louis > > -Original Message- > From: Tony Breeds [mailto:t...@bakeyournoodle.com] > Sent: Thursday, February 23, 2017 1:51 PM > To: Henry Fourie > Cc: Jeremy Stanley; Cathy Zhang; Tristan Cacqueray; > openstack-infra@lists.openstack.org; Kendall Nelson > Subject: Re: [OpenStack-Infra] Ballot for Openstack elections > > On Thu, Feb 23, 2017 at 08:27:49PM +, Henry Fourie wrote: >> Jeremy, >>Cathy is an owner of a recent commit: >> https://review.openstack.org/401349 > > That change is owned by Louie not Cathy. > > Note I am not an election offical but the election timeline [2] states: > > The electorate for this election are the Foundation individual members > that > are also committers for one of the official project teams repositories > over > the Newton-Ocata timeframe (Apr 11, 2016 00:00 UTC to Jan 23, 2017 23:59 > UTC). > > So from there we can deduce the following URL[2]: > > https://review.openstack.org/#/q/after:2016-04-11+before:2017-01-24+is:merged+owner:cathy > > Which would make Cathy eligable to vote in an election in Release Management > but not Neutron. > > Yours Tony. > > [1] https://governance.openstack.org/election/#electorate > [2] The date range in the URL is slightly more generous than the one specified > in [1] > signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ OpenStack-Infra mailing list OpenStack-Infra@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-infra
Re: [OpenStack-Infra] Ballot for Openstack elections
On Thu, Feb 23, 2017 at 12:57:21PM +1100, Michael Still wrote: > Certainly this is what nova has done in the past: collected co-authors, > verified their membership status, and then proposed them to extra-atcs. Where would this script live? openstack/election ? openstack-infra/release-tools ? I know there was one but I knocked one together: http://paste.openstack.org/show/600424 Tony. signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ OpenStack-Infra mailing list OpenStack-Infra@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-infra
